GPL is rather limiting in how you can use the code. A large company (e.g. Apple) won't let something gpl be used heavily internally if they can help it since they won't be able to apply patches or modify it without releasing these changes ... this obligation adds significant legal burden and, furthermore, releasing the changes could reveal private details about the companies internals.
I don't think that the commentor's reason is a good one, but I can understand the viewpoint; GPLv3 is quite limiting for some uses.
As long as it's only used and distributed internally, I don't believe the GPL has a problem with them modifying it without disclosing their changes. That's my understanding.
GPL is rather limiting in how you can use the code. A large company (e.g. Apple) won't let something gpl be used heavily internally if they can help it since they won't be able to apply patches or modify it without releasing these changes ... this obligation adds significant legal burden and, furthermore, releasing the changes could reveal private details about the companies internals.
I don't think that the commentor's reason is a good one, but I can understand the viewpoint; GPLv3 is quite limiting for some uses.